As an immigrant, I have never - nor ever will - take a dime from the Federal Government because non-citizens are ineligible for most of the entitlements that you take for granted and eagerly expect (despite not liking paying for them).

Nevertheless, since the more Conservative values in society caused the debt ceiling mess by failing to compromise, it is perhaps right that they - and the constituencies that voted for them - should foot the bill should the debt ceiling fail to be raised by then.

So, if it comes to it, some have argued that military wages should not be paid; veterans benefits should not be paid; and, social security payments should be delayed. After all, many in these groups voted the Republicans/tea party in.

That would allow America's debt payments to continue uninterrputed together with those benefits mostly used by the more progressive in American society e.g. Medicare, Medicaid, education, government pay checks etc.

WELL....uncle has been taking 15% of my pay for SS for 47 years. I want the check. If I could have kept the money to myself, I could be a bizzillionaire by now. SO, you can cut the pay for congress, but if you mess with SS you will have a riot on your hands!@

No checks for any congressman, senator or his "top" aide for the next three years.

They'll have to sell their foreign monster cars to survive, poor babies. And maybe rent that shack in Aspen.

Obama-sama can lead by taking a buck a year for the rest of his term. And he and the wife can ride Amtrack to Chicago. And buy an armored GM Volt. With HIS Chicago mob money.

And all lawyers get an automatic 25% tax on GROSS income, flat rate. On top of the regular forms.

Mayors in cities over 150,000 souls can join that tax club too.

Lobbyists: $1000 per week "fee" for access to congress.

And the ethically bankrupt slimy lizard late night slip and fall TV lawyers [and most others] can only be stopped by making the losing party pay double the defending parties legal cost plus penalties. As in England, I believe.

We lost much of our manufaturing to these sleaze bag lawyers and the laws their filthy friends in Congress keep in place for them. I have had 2 partners - both congressman. One is great, but dirty rich from working the system on the edge of legality. The other is just a criminal.

Now thats a tea party we can all smile about

So the answer is you tax PARASITES of our society. HARD. When the wives of Senators shop at Costco instead of Whole foods, you have proof our lives are improving.

Deciding who does not get a check is not the first thing to do. The first thing to do is to reduce the cost of providing the checks. You could layoff 5% of government workers, reduce their pay by 10%, and reduce their pension and benefits by 20% and they would still be overpaid and underworked by private industry standards. Low level professionals at the university in the community I live in start with five weeks of paid vacation and a health insurance and retirement plan that is far more expensive than I and other self employeds could ever afford.

Typically, people take governments jobs not for the pay, but for the benefits, such as vacation, health insurance, and pensions. If you want to cut these benefits, that has to happen for new people starting. You can't take a person who has worked 20 years for shitty pay and was promised good benefits and take it away, just like you can't (I hope) stop paying social Security to US Citizens who have paid into the system for 50 years or more. And no, I never had a goverment job, but I do know several people who do, and their jobs are certainly not cushy and overpaid for what they do. Now politicians, thats another story. Make friends, make promises, get elected, get lifetime benefits for doing nothing but wasting taxpayers money arguing with each other for the sake of arguing.

Thanks for your thoughts BobL. I do not know any government workers who receive poor pay, especially when their pay is compared with persons in the private sector who have similar duties and responsibilities. I would be interested in knowing how, for example, the wages and benefits of a plumbing inspector compare with a plumber. And I do not understand why benefits could not be prospectively reduced. For example, private industry has, for the most part, been reducing health insurance benefits to workers for at least the last ten years.

I don't know what plumbing inspectors or plumbers earn, but my wife drove a school bus for many years at fairly low pay for the crap she had to deal with like some disrespectful, nasty kids of all grades, and their likewise mannered parents. there were enough good kids to keep her actually likng the job. the vacation and health insurance benefits were very good to compensate for the low pay. she drove for a school district, not a private company. My wife retired from that job a few years ago, and to think after all those years she worked, that her pension benefits could be reduced is unfathomable to me. When you say government workers, that covers a lot of ground. Lots of clerks and low paid people work government jobs. There are some of those that don't deserve to serve the public, but I would say that is a minority. Their are teachers that are overpaid, police officers that are overpaid in both salary and benefits, but maybe not everywhere. Where I live, there are, in my opinion. My opinion is just that, and I respect your opinion as well.

Thank you for your personal observations and experiences. Perhaps, as you point out, I should add to my list of complaints government's inability/unwillingness to terminate unproductie workers. And I agree that vested pension rights could not be terminated, but I believe that nonvested benefits and contributions towards future benefits could be reduced if there was the political will to do so.